Apple is keeping it pricey with a $49 cable for its new Thunderbolt interface. (Source: Ubergizmo)

(Source: iFixIt)

Apple's Thunderbolt cable contains over 10 chips (Source: iFixIt)

But this cable has chips, so it must be worth it!

Apple,
Inc. (AAPL) is borrowing a play from
Monster Cables offering a cable that's almost as pricey as the peripherals it
plans to support. The new Thunderbolt cable will retail for $49 USD.

Plugging in to the Mini Display Port of new
MacBook Pros and iMacs,
the cable offers support for "Thunderbolt", a new high speed
communications standard from Intel Corp. (INTC). With the first
peripheral (a RAID drive bay from Pegasus)
launching, attention has turned to this pricey little number.

IFixIttore the white cable
apart and found a pair of Gennum
GN2033 chips hiding beneath the sheathing, with one on each connector
of the cable. In total there were also 10 other smaller tiny chips and an
assortment of transistors, etc.

And there's the question of USB 3.0, which has already seen much more broad
adoption. USB 3.0 offers transfer speeds of up to 4 Gbit/s. While
only about half the speed of the current Thunderbolt implementation, that's
still pretty blazing fast so the question remains how many customers will
actually notice a difference.

To Monster Cables' credit, at least it only charges $29 for
its "gold-plated" USB 2.0 cables, which it brags "rejects
noise" and works to "maximize signal integrity." Sound
familiar?

Comments

Threshold

Username

Password

remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

There's no appreciable difference between the 2 companies, other than the obvious difference of exactly what consumer products they sell. They operate the same way - as predators preying on the unsophisticated...promising to deliver unto them that sophistication which they seek, for outlandish prices.

You are exactly right. There are lots of cables out there just as good as Monster's for a lot less. Same with Apple's computers. Ah, but the Monster and Apple fanboys will beg to differ. It should make for fun reading.

As long as the product that Intel has doesn't do the same thing that HTC's does there is no infringement. i.e. one is a data transfer tech and the other is probably a phone.And it is Intel and HTC not Apple and Verizon. Apple and Verizon just market the other companies tech.

Apparently, if you pay $1,000 for a Monster Cable instead of $10 for an equally appropriate cable from Monoprice you get...umm...well, you get f%cked. Which is what you paid for, obviously - the privelege of getting f%cked over by the vendor. Pirks thinks that's a good thing.

Why exactly are you pretending that all of the DT articles that have showcased all the Apple design/quality/reliabilty problems didn't get published? Do you honestly expect those of use here at DT, who have seen you puke your same garbage EVERY SINGLE TIME in every one of those articles, to believe that you didn't see them?

That's what you're trying to say. You didn't see them. You've seen the proof. You refuse to accept it. That's your problem...and not my responsibility to keep trying to fix it.

You remind me of a little joke that came out in a botany class once..."you can lead a horticulture but you can't make her think."

Why exactly are you pretending that all of the DT articles that have showcased all the Apple consumer ratings being highest in the industry or close to that didn't get published? Do you honestly expect those of use here at DT, who have seen you puke your same insane "magic" garbage EVERY SINGLE TIME in every one of those articles, to believe that you didn't see them?

So you're saying you didn't see them? Or did you? You refuse to accept them because you are too afraid to look dumb? Is that your problem?

quote: Why exactly are you pretending that all of the DT articles that have showcased all the Apple design/quality/reliabilty problems didn't get published?

Why exactly are you pretending that all of the DT articles that have showcased all the other computer builders like Dell/Sony/HP/etc design/quality/reliability problems didn't get published? What's the difference between Apple's problems and other computer maker's problems? You look dumb precisely because you try to imply that only Apple has issues, while everyone knows it's 100% lie. EVERYONE has issues, not JUST Apple. Stop looking like a juvenile liar Moto! I beg ya :)

I support the right of people to throw their money away on anything at all, or even burn it in their fireplace if that's what they want to do.

Any cable designed to meet a particular spec will meet that spec. Monster is notorious for inventing false advantages ("Our cables are insulated with whale-free polyethylene! No free radicals to spoil your deep bass experience!) in order to carve out an extreme-price market niche.

This is NOT to say that these cables don't meet the spec. I assume they do. It's just that the other far-less-expensive cables do, also.

It's just a shame that the average consumer doesn't understand what digital means. The quality of the cable does NOT matter, if the 1 to 1 digital signal can pass through, it will sound as good as a $20,000 braided gold strand cable.

I saw a cool demonstration once of someone who used a metal coat hanger for the conducting material of an audio cable. Out of hundreds of audiophile types comparing the sound quality of a Monster Cable to the coat hanger cable in a double blind test, none of them could actually say which one sounded better.

Macs and OS X are measurably different than their competitors (windows, linux, dell, hp) in terms of features and capabilities. Apple chooses to charge a premium - whether it's worth it is up to the consumer.

I don't know why he got rated down, he's right isn't he? Mac's are considerably different from windows PC's in terms of features and capabilities. And yes, Apple should be able to charge a premium for that if consumers are willing to pay that premium.

Why when I take Acer and MacBook Pro in my hands I see that MacBook's screen is noticeably better, especially when I pick the matte option (cheap Acers are all ugly glossy screens these days), why Acer squeaks and creaks in my hand and MacBook feels like a slab of metal, why MacBooks keyboard is firm and a pleasure to type unlike Acer's, why MacBook's large touch pad is more comfortable for multitouch gestures than smaller Acer's touch pad? Why no stickers on MacBook unlike Acer? Why no bloatware and Notron shit on MacBook unlike Acer? Why Acer works a few hours less on a battery than MacBook Pro? Why is Acer thicker and heavier than MacBook? Why I can put MacBook on a soft surface and its cooling system will continue to work as usual because the cold air intake is not at the bottom, while Acer's cooling system with moronically designed cold air intake at the bottom will be blocked by the soft surface underneath?

Enough facts?

Will you start your insane babble about "magic" again? Just curious how hard you try this time to slip out of this and get on your "magic" drivel instead of addressing the facts above :))

What Acer? Because, you know, there's more than one. So you starting your "argument" by not specifying which one...or even a price range, or a style of machine, makes the entirety of your rant invalid. I have seen low-end Acer machines that are very plastic, do feel somewhat flimsy, and aren't all that aesthetically pleasing - but those models cost maybe $400. I've also seen more expensive Acer machines replete with nice anodized aluminum, more solid designs, more attractive aesthetics...and a heftier price tag. But...you probably know that, which is why you're presenting a fallacious argument to begin with by being intentionally vague.

quote: MacBook's large touch pad is more comfortable for multitouch gestures than smaller Acer's touch pad?

Your assertion is not fact. This is only your own wildly biased opinion, at best.

quote: Why no stickers on MacBook unlike Acer?

Because Windows machines have to compete. Since they're all interchangable between different brands, each model has to make a big deal about what it's specific features are and try to draw the consumer into it. Because at the end of the day, there's a wad of different Windows machine manufacturers and every possible combination of specs and features is represented...so they have to draw the consumers attention in the store. Macs don't compete on features...specs...or price. They compete based on the fact that it's an Apple product. Features, specs, etc. are irrelevant to that buyer. So there's no stickers. And at any rate - do you not see how utterly vapid you've proven yourself to be by trying to declare that "no stickers" is some kind of great virtue of a Mac over a PC? This is quite possibly the stupidest thing you've ever said...unless you're somehow under the impression that those stickers don't just peel right off once you have the machine at home. Then again...that kind of thinking is probably beyond your primate-level brain capacity.

quote: hy no bloatware and Notron shit on MacBook unlike Acer?

Exact same reason as the stickers. Because Windows machines are highly interchangeable, the OEMs use software bundling to try to differentiate their product. That attempt to differentiate has resulted in nothing but bloatware. Sad but true. The reason it's not on Macs is the same reason why there's no stickers - Apple has no need to differentiate by product features of any kind, including software bundles. You're either going to buy an Apple, or your aren't. That decision is made long before you go to the store/place the order, and nothings going to change it.

...and on and on and on. I'm not going to directly address any of your "vs. Acer" assertions for the reason I noted at the beginning of this post. And why are you picking on Acer anyway? The fact of the matter is that all Windows machines are essentially interchangeable - and that's why the Windows marketshare is so strong. The OEMs have to compete on features, specs, quality, and price - which means a VAST array of options for the consumer. Since Apple doesn't compete on any of those issues...well, none of them matter. You're either going to buy one or you aren't, and that's all there is to it.

...because if you're going to buy an Apple product, it's because of the "magic" that Steve told you was in there. And you believed him.

Funny how you selected only a few statements to 'disprove' and completely disregarded the rest.He's completely right on most points. The biggest concern is that apple charges more for weaker hardware. So let's compare. The only real competition to the MBP 13 is the HP envy 14.

In their base models, you get a similar i5 cpu (2.3 GHz), with the Envy getting 2GB of ram more, a larger HDD and a standalone graphics card. With apple, you get a 16:10 screen with a bigger vertical resolution, you get a thiner and lighter device, and you get a better quality screen and a better battery. Extras such as magsafe adapter and a better trackpad on one side, and USB 3.0 on the other are worthy mentions.When you put all of that together, as always, it comes down to your personal preference. I don't need a GPU, so that's the first thing i will remove from my calculations. With the macbook, i get a lighther machine, that can use all three majos operating systems, that i use regularly (XCode i.e.), that is lighter and with a better battery (and better power management in OS X). And it costs just 200 more. It is not noticeablely slower, and even if it was, it wouldn't be more than a few seconds on a one minute task. I waste more time going to the toilet with newspapers :D

I just don't understand why there's such a hate towards apple, when you have, by your own words, so much to chose from from other manufacturers.

In a laptop world, performance is not everything, especially on a 13-14'' device. Battery, construction, keyboard and trackpad and screen quality are my five top things in this form factor.

It has nothing to do with steve, or magic. It has to do with the features i expect and simply the fact that one is the closest.

Funny how you selected only a few statements to 'disprove' and completely disregarded the rest.

The video card in the HP machine makes the integrated Intel graphics in the MBP look like a wind-up toy. And is easily worth $200 in additional cost. But hey, we can ignore that huge fact because you don't care about it.

eSata, as usual for Apple, is ignored in favor of the antiquated firewire connection. HP has it.

I did mention the graphics card. And i said that it comes down to personal preference. Somebody needs a graphics card in a 13'' laptop. I don't. Most people I know don't. I doubt they are an unrepresentative group of people.

I'm just saying that in this form factor, performance isn't everything, it usually isn't in the top 5 on which you will make your decision. Apple has quite a few advantages, that are, in my opinion, much more important for a real mobile laptop.

quote: I have seen low-end Acer machines that are very plastic, do feel somewhat flimsy, and aren't all that aesthetically pleasing

So you just proved my point! You agreed that you get what you paid for! Jee Moto, I had no idea you'd heal so fast :)))

quote: Macs don't compete on features...specs...or price. They compete based on the fact that it's an Apple product. Features, specs, etc. are irrelevant to that buyer

This is BEYOND DUMB, way way waaayy beyond dumb, this is insanity. Only a few really hardcore Apple freaks, totally brain damaged Apple freaks, buy Apple stuff just because of the logo. You think that ALL Apple customers are these kind of brain dead zealots which is why you look so funny and childish :))) You SERIOUSLY think all these hundreds of millions of guys and gals bought their MacBooks and iPods and iPads and iPhones JUST BECAUSE OF THE APPLE LOGO??!! You are totally unbelievably insane, you need to seek professional help, seriously. IF you REALLY think like that. Do you? Tell me you're pulling my leg.

Man, I know myself, and I know about a dozen of my friends who bought some Apple gear, one got Air, two got iPads, a few got iPods, NO ONE of them, NOT A SINGLE PERSON got their Apple stuff only because of the Apple logo. They tried it, they compared it with other hardware, and they chose them because they felt Apple's features and design beat the crap out of other products. IMPORTANT NOTE: all of them do not possess the full spectrum of Apple gear, i.e. most of them use Windows PCs everywhere, and laptops too, because they believe Windows laptops are better. What does it prove? It proves your total insanity, Moto. You are sick, you need professional help, really. You can't think all Apple customers are brain dead zealots. A fair chunk of them are but VERY VERY FAR FROM ALL.

quote: You're either going to buy an Apple, or your aren't. That decision is made long before you go to the store/place the order, and nothings going to change it.

Lies lies lies. For most customers it's lies. Only minority is brain dead Apple fanatics, majority just likes Apple hardware and buys it for various objective reasons. Just go to Apple store and try to talk to some of the people about why they got what they got, why they didn't get non-Apple stuff, and you'll see that most of the answers won't be "because it's Appple", it will be more like "because Apple product such and such does this and that better for me"

quote: because if you're going to buy an Apple product, it's because of the "magic" that Steve told you was in there. And you believed him

Nah, if I weren't using Apple hardware stuff at work for a couple of years I'd maybe believed you, but I know from my practical experience that you are lying. I know that Apple devices are still somewhat different from others, and most often this difference in features and design is what makes people buy it, not your "magic" fantasy. I mean yes, a few people buy because of "magic" but not all of them, and you still keep lying that ALL of them are like that. This is a serious problem Moto, I'll try to fix it, maybe I can carefully talk you out of your insanity, we'll see :))

Joking aside, I get it. Wife approval (or acceptance) factor (WAF) is what drives this niche economy of Monster, Bose, Apple, etc. Make a product that LOOKS nice, PROMISES an unprecedented experience, and carries a HIGH PRICE to allay all doubt that you are buying a run-of-the-mill product. If you can afford it and you think it's good, then go ahead, you don't need anyone's permission to waste your money.

But regardless, I'm a Sr. Systems Engineer, and my primary computer in my home office is a Mac. I also have a MacBook Pro, iPod, and iPad, and 3 Apple TV's. The Apple ecosystem's interoperability has no equal.

I also have have one physical Linux box, and run several Linux VM's as well a Windows 7 VM.My point is I'm familiar with OSX, Linux, Windows, and Unix. As far a desktop operating system is concerned, Mac OSX is superior.

The GUI is much more polished than Linux, and is MUCH more stable than Windows, while at the same time providing the power of the Free BSD Unix command line. It cannot be beat.

Our Sr. Architect also runs Mac OS X as his primary workstation at home. At work, we run Ubuntu on our workstations, Redhat or CentOS on our servers.

Unsophisticated? I've conversed with many Mac OSX users in various forums, and the are not unsophisticated in the least.

You are the one who's lack of sophistication is evidenced by your juvenile misconceptions.